to their bulk, as is the volume of Watts, the instances would be few in which our people would be found so poor as to be unable to provide themselves with both works.

And although the want of hymns in Watts, adapted to particular subjects, is generally, and I believe with truth, alleged as one reason of the necessity of an additional supply, yet there are in his works more hymns of this cha racter than in any compilation, with which I am acquainted, that does not include some of his compositions. When ministers are searching for hymns of a character to give a uniform tone and design to all the various parts of a public service, they have not, in general, to complain that their choice is perplexed by the number suitable to their purpose, and provided for their selection, being too great.

In conclusion, permit me to express a doubt whether the number of Watts's productions unfit for public worship is so great as some are disposed to represent. The idea of providing sacred songs for the praise of God, which every individual in a promiscuous assembly may unite in with sincerity and propriety, is plainly impracticable. Nor is the pleasure and edification of the truly devout and spiritual part of a congregation to be too much sacrificed to the laudable object of preserving peculiarly spiritual and sacred language from being profaned by thoughtless lips. Here, as in every similar case, the wise and happy medium should be sought. On the whole, my verdict is for an entire Watts, and a judicious and ample supplemental selection, committed to the hands of our pastors, who, if they do their duty with vigilance and judgment, will then be enabled to select sacred songs, suitable, delightful, and edifying. But the music-the tunes the singing-alas! who NEW SERIES, No. 19.

P

THE REV. H. GREY ON THE SCOTTISH MISSIONARY DEPUTATION.*

(To the Editors.) GENTLEMEN-My attention having been called to the note at the foot of page 242 of the Congregational Magazine of this month, in which the Deputation of the Scottish Missionary Society, who visited London in 1819, are represented as having, at the Anniversary meeting of the Society, held soon after their return, omitted to take any notice of the liberality of the Independent and Baptist congregations in contributing to their cause; I immediately made a search for memoranda of the statement I gave on that occasion; and, as I should be extremely sorry to be thought to have overlooked our obligations to our christian friends of these denominations, I am happy to have it in my power to present the following extracts from these memoranda, which it is much more probable I should have enlarged than diminished in publicly delivering them :

"I must not forget to observe that the donations made us by the London Missionary Society, and by the Baptist Society, the former of 400 guineas, the latter of 100, not only afforded us the highest encouragement and gratification, as a proof of the truly brotherly affection with which these Societies viewed the labours of our missionaries, but served also, I have no doubt, to contribute materially to our success, by the testimony of approbation thus given us by these highly respectable bodies."-"The circumstance of our being admitted into sixty pulpits in the metropolis and its vicinity is no small proof of the liberality of feeling exercised towards us: and though the collections, taken separately, were usually small, as arising from congregations neither large nor opulent, yet, taken together, they form a very handsome sum, and afford a pleasing evidence of that unity of spirit which is the chief ornament of the christian character, and is something so incomparably better than the most perfect unity of form, that the latter seems scarcely worthy a thought when placed by its side. The three great denominations of Dissenters, the Scottish Presbyterians, the Independents, and the Baptists, received us as brethren, and gave their ready and affectionate assistance."

In other notices, too trivial to "be given in the shape of extracts, I find corresponding sentiments expressed on different parts of the subject. That I should have intentionally omitted the mention of our friends of the Independent and Baptist churches; or should have spoken of them in any other terms than those of the highest respect and affection, was morally impossible it would have been a violation of private feeling, no less than of public duty, in one who numbers, and has numbered,

among the members of these churches some of his most valued and dearest friends. The liberality of the ministers of these denominations, too, in admitting those of us who are of the Church of Scotland into their pulpits, is the more honourable and deserving of acknowledgment, as, in consequence of a regulation which many here regret, the same privilege can scarcely be conceded them in reference to the pulpits of our Establishment.

Having been led to refer to these discussions, I must confess that a sentiment of disapprobation is awakened in my mind by these minute calculations of the comparative liberality of the two countries; for to which ever side the superiority is attributed, is not its grace and beauty injured by such anxious demonstration ?—so opposite, as appears to me, to the spirit of a precept applicable to combined as well as to individual charity, "Let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth." Instead of repining at what is deemed the unrequited excess of our contributions to English Societies, it appears to me that our real advantage lies in their extent, and in the increased vigour of that feeling that would delight in multiplying and enlarging them. London is necessarily the centre of a great many religious associations that have not, and cannot have, corresponding institutions here. These are not to be considered as English, contradistinguished from Scottish, institutions, but as national undertakings absorbing, and supplied by, the whole current of Christian beneficence, which flows spontaneously in their direction, and for which no outlet exists, save what they furnish. Nor are contribu tions to them to be considered by any means in the light of favours, imposing obligation on the Societies that undertake the trou

ble and responsibility of applying them to the purposes for which they are intended by the donors. The obligation, in the estimate of Christian benevolence, lies fairly on the other side; for, without the facilities afforded by these institutions, the zeal of distant contributors, having no sphere of activity, must fail of the attainment of its object. The shepherd, according to the heathen philosopher, looks not to his flock for a return in grass, but in wool; and Christian benevolence is not wont to expect its remuneration in the esteem or gratitude of the agents it employs, but in the accomplishment of wishes instigated by Christian love and sanctioned by divine approbation. Scot land, in fact, has comparatively no use for contributions to the same amount as those she makes to England, and has no more cause to complain of the want of them than the population of her country has cause to complain that she does not receive back again from the Exchequer, for domestic purposes, a sum equivalent to the quota she contributes toward the defence of the country and the maintenance of the government.

The insertion of this letter in an early number of your useful and estimable Magazine will much oblige,

Gentlemen,
Yours very respectfully,
HENRY GREY.

Edinburgh, 18th May, 1826.

A PLAN FOR PROVIDING A FUND FOR THE RELIEF OF INFIRM AND SUPERANNUATED MINIS

TERS.

GENTLEMEN-I am much obliged to your correspondent who, in the May number of your Magazine, brought forward the subject of a provision for superannuated ministers; for although I differ from

him as to the means by which such a fund. should be raised, I most cordially agree with him on the propriety of the general principle. It appears to me that disgrace lies somewhere, for the neglect, till this time, of a subject which prefers such strong claims on the generosity and gratitude of our churches. Our pastors are not, generally, men of affluence, who can spend their strength under the heat and burden of the day with the consciousness that, should they become prematurely old and infirm, they have a competency on which to retire from the cares and fatigues of office. They cannot, generally, look forward to the otium cum dignitate, as characterising the evening of their existence. Many a laborious servant of the cross, notwithstanding his habitual trust in the Master whom he serves, has often turned, amidst the sensible diminution of his strength, with an anxious eye to the lengthening shadows and gathering clouds of approaching night. Such a care is more likely to press upon the pastor's heart, perhaps, in the present age, than in others that are past. A style of preaching is now popular, which, in most cases, requires something of the ardour of youth to sustain it; so that if, by any circumstances, a minister becomes un; settled, in whom the fervid manner of early years is in a considerable degree abated, he has little chance of success, if he compete for a new situation with a more juvenile candidate. Superannu ation is therefore likely to take place oftener, at least in the estimation of the public, and at an earlier age, than formerly. Such a provision as that in question appears to me to be necessary, therefore, not merely for relieving actual distress, but also for abating the fear which arises from the contemplation of its probability. I know that the minister should,

2

and, generally speaking, does, trust in God for his supplies during the period of old age and infirmity; but man is a frail creature, weak in faith, and feeble in hope, and we should pity our brother, and avert, as much as possible, his temptations to unbelief and distrust. Our lay-brethren are just as much called upon to trust in God for futurity as we are, and yet they lay up for old

age.

There is another point of view in which the subject may be contemplated, and that is, its bearing upon the prosperity of our churches. Is it not the case, that an aged minister is often tempted to cling to a situation in which he has outlived his usefulness, merely because his daily bread depends, at least in his view, in remaining where he is? Who will elect him at his time of life? What hope has he of gaining another situation, if he quit the one he occupies? His church is far too poor to allow him an annuity, and raise a salary for his successor. They respect and love him, and are prevented by these feelings of attachment from doing any thing to hurt his mind; but still they cannot be so blinded by their attachment, as not to perceive that their numbers are diminishing under the enfeebled ministry of their pastor. What a struggle is all this time going on in the good man's mind, between the conviction that he should resign, and the dread of that destitution which would be likely to follow his resignation! We want a provision for such a minister as this, by which the church would be relieved from its embarrassing situation, the pastor taken care of, and the cause of religion furthered by the choice of a more efficient, because more able-bodied, labourer.

The cases are very many in which the church could not provide for two ministers

an

aged and infirm one, and a young and active one. Where this can be done, it should be done. Honourable instances are to be found, in which churches have released their pastors from the cares of office, and testified their gratitude and love by settling upon them a handsome annuity. They felt that they owed their own selves, their very souls, to those who had laboured among them, as long as they could labour, in word and doctrine. Yes, there are church-members who have such a sense of their obligations to a faithful holy minister, that rather than he should want, or be supported in old age by foreign assistance, they would sell every article of plate in their house, and, if that were not enough, would share their loaf with the man of God. “He is ours," they exclaim, "ours to the very last. He cannot be a burden to us, and he never shall be to others. lived spiritually upon the vigour of his mind, while he was yet in the meridian of his strength; and now that he is old and grey-headed, he shall live temporally upon the fruits of our industry.'

We

There are such churches; and there would be more of them, if others had property equal to their affection for their ministers. For those, then, who would, but cannot, provide for an aged or infirm pastor, a source of supply is indispensable.

That no adequate fund exists to meet this case, is, I believe, admitted. How, then, shall it be raised? To the plan proposed by your respectable and benevolent correspondent, I have a most decided objection. The money collected after the Lord's Supper is given for a special purpose, and that purpose is the relief of such of the members of the church as may then be in a state of distress, either by poverty or sickness. It would be taking advantage of: a

term to say, that because it is collected for the saints, therefore it may be applied with propriety to ministers. I believe it will be conceded to me by all, that the fund collected at the Lord's Supper is rarely adequate to the object for which it is raised. There is a gross neglect of the spirit, whatever conformity there may be to the letter, of this part of the duty connected with the institute of the Supper. Our necessitous members do not receive the assistance which they ought. In most cases, double the amount of what is contributed ought to be gathered and expended. I am aware that the sum which it is proposed should be abstracted from this fund, is very small; but as the whole is already too little to meet the wants of the church, I object to the deducting of a penny.

Besides, it would have the appearance of selfishness on the part of the ministers, thus to take from the poor for their own comfort. It is not that the amount thus applied would be great; but the principle itself is objectionable. It looks too much like careing for ourselves. There would be, of course, no right, on the part of either pastor or deacons, to make such an appropriation as is proposed, without the consent of the church; and how many of our members are there who, it may be expected, would object to it, and who, if their views were overruled by a majority, would withdraw their contribution altogether. Would not the subject excite the clamour of the poor, and endanger the peace of the whole body?

To this it may be replied, that it is only for the members to contribute a little more at their monthly communion, and the end will be accomplished without any di minution of the assistance afforded to the poor. But would it not be better to have a separate sub

scription, to a small amount, and keep the monies raised at the Supper to be exclusively applied to the object for which they are given. I do not like the principle of touching, for any object whatever, the donations given by the brethren for the members of their own body at that time in actual distress.

Perhaps I shall be asked, if I have any other plan of my own to propose. I have. First, then, I say, Let all our MOST AFFLUENT MINISTERS themselves come forward with a liberal donation towards forming a fund for the relief of their poorer brethren. Such men we have among us-men who are living in all the comfort and most of the luxury of life, to whom a handsome sum, would be no great sacrifice. The writer of this article, although not one of the foremost in this class, yet desires to be thankful that he has bread enough, and to spare; and he calls upon his brethren in similar circumstances to come forward in this business. We have no fears upon us of an old age of penury and neglect. We can live without the bounty of our friends, if to-morrow we should become infirm and incompetent to the duties of our office. We are the men to be first looked to, and from whom help may be first expected. We may be supposed to have a fellow feeling for our ministerial brethren, and should set the example. When we have done our duty, and set our example, then with what confidence may we go to our lay friends, and especially the richer ones, and ask them to do likewise? I challenge, therefore, my brethren to come forward. I will join them in the business, and lend all the little influence in my power to promote the object.

When the MOST AFFLUENT have done their duty, the next class will not be wanting in theirs, till almost the poorest will do some